PRADEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Asim Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State.

(2.) Present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding as well as the charge sheet dtd. 5/9/2017, including the cognizance order dtd. 30/5/2019 in Case No. 30028 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.582 of 2010, under Ss. 448, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- New Agra, District Agra pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

(3.) Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that it is undisputed that the adjoining plot, i.e. 200 sq mtr, belongs to the applicant's father, and the first informant is the applicant's maternal uncle. The present proceeding is malicious, as several disputes have been pending between the parties. It is further submitted that as per Sec. 441 of IPC (U.P. Amendment), there is a requirement for sending a notice to call upon the encroacher to withdraw himself from the property. It is further submitted that no offence under Sec. 448 IPC is made out because it is the admitted case of the informant that it was the plot, while Sec. 448 IPC is regarding trespassing in the house. He further submits that the requirement for sending notice before lodging the FIR under Sec. 441 IPC is mandatory.